I have a colleague in physics and chemistry who uses the Texas Instrument
CBL system.
I'll ask him about it. He teaches in an interdisciplinary "Intro to the
Natural World" course.
As to the AP Env. Sci.course, Paul Burchard has created a link to the AP
course in question from the
ESI97 homepage (or go direct to: URL:
http://www.collegeboard.org/ap/html/indx001.html). There you can find a rather
complete outline, teacher resources, etc. I would be very interested in
starting a discussion on that AP course.
I looked at the outline the other day and found it quite good, though I have
a few questions and concerns. For sake of discussion
let me post them and see what you and others think as well as yourself:
a) Like many of the "environmental science" textbooks out there, the
outline tends to be a "grab bag" of issues
covering a very wide diversity of topics. That is good from an "exposure"
to issues and problems on the environment perspective.
But I think there could be legitimate concern that students could lose in
terms of "depth" - particularly in
terms of understanding the basic functioning of "natural systems" and how
"humans perturb, mitigate, sustain" those systems.
b) I also believe it tends to NOT do well at clarifying "local - to
regional to global" linkages (the whole
scale issue in earth systems). Both "temporal" vs. "spatial" scalar issues.
c) As usual among most such courses, in my view, it is weak on
"environmental justice" issues - dealing with
how environmental issues affect and create "vulnerabilities" for different
groups of people that differ from place
to place, between cultures, classes, etc. And as someone particularly
concerned with how "consumption of resources"
in the First World affects the Third World, I feel it lacks depth there and
propogates some simplistic notions about
actual situations, causes, responses, consequences, etc.
d) The outline seems to be particularly weak, and still using generally
outdated concepts and approaches, when
it comes to dealing with the "population-resource" issue and the somewhat
disputed concept of "carrying capacity".
I'll have to see how it actually evolves, but in my experience, most
environmental science textbooks being
published at present have not caught up with the rapidly changing debate in
this arena and still project some
rather simplistic "reductionist" perspectives that don't reflect work done
by broader interdisciplinary teams looking at
both the "human ecological" perspectives as well as strict "biological
ecological" perspectives.
e) There is always room, I believe, for discussion on what the "goal" of
any environmental science course should be:
To create "environmental awareness and consciousness-raising" among the
citizenry at large; to instill a strong understanding
of natural science principles, particularly from a systems perspective; to
teach the scientific method/thinking, etc?
All the above are useful societal goals, but I wonder if it can be done well
in one basic course? If a choice is made as to
emphasis - which goal to prioritize - I would err on the side of teaching
"how science works" and how to "think scientifically"
rather than overemphasizing the "consciousness-raising" function (which I
believe often becomes the primary goal).
I'm sure many will disagree with my perspective - let me know what you think?
Bob Ford
At 09:14 PM 5/11/97 -0600, Robert Ford wrote:
>Received: from www.woodrow.org (woodrow.webex.net [204.249.170.56]) by
bw.webex.net (8.8.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id WAA29492; Sun, 11 May 1997 22:45:49
-0400 (EDT)
>Received: by www.woodrow.org (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
> id WAA20594; Sun, 11 May 1997 22:54:03 -0400
>Received: from ccmail.sunysb.edu by www.woodrow.org (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
> id WAA20590; Sun, 11 May 1997 22:53:57 -0400
>Received: from ccmail.sunysb.edu by ccmail.sunysb.edu (PMDF V5.0-6 #18385)
> id <01IIRDEWX0QUCA0AG6@ccmail.sunysb.edu> for esi97@www.woodrow.org; Sun,
> 11 May 1997 22:47:14 -0500 (EST)
>Message-id: <Pine.PMDF.3.91.970511224232.742403814B-100000@ccmail.sunysb.edu>
>Sender: owner-esi97@www.woodrow.org
>Precedence: normal
>Date: Sun, 11 May 1997 21:47:14 -0600
>From: L Padwa <lpadwa@ccmail.sunysb.edu>
>To: esi97@www.woodrow.org
>Subject: a question about equipment
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain
>Content-Disposition: inline
>
>Hi all,
>I am wondering how many of the group are familiar with the Texas
>Instrument CBL system. My school is considering buying some units for
>the env. sci class, but I don't feel comfortable with the equipment yet.
>Is this worth exploring? Useful for fieldwork?
>
>Could any one help me with this equipment over the summer?
>
>In addition, if anyone is familiar with the new AP Env. Sci. class I
>would like to start a conversation about the program.
>
>Thanks.
>
>Linda Padwa
>
>